1957 Topps - What would be considered a "low pop?"

[Archive]

Posted By: jackgoodman

So, as an example, I've looked at the 1957 Topps Baseball set on the PSA Pop Report.

I'm trying to determine what cards would be considered "low pop." I know PSA 9 & 10 would qualify easily, but let's look at the PSA 8 (no qualifier) category.

There are 37811 cards graded PSA 8. If I divide the number of different cards in the set (let's say 415 for ease), that would give an average of 91 of each card graded as such.

Would it be appropriate then to consider any card with less than 91 examples as a "low pop" card? Or is there another method to use.

Your input will be appreciated. Thanks.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

I would say for 1957 Topps pop 50 or less. Probably means ex checklists and contest cards, 25 cards or so could be classified as this--most of which come from the series(3rd) that goes from roughly 260-340. Last time I checked I think Garcia and Kellner are lowest pops in set--both around 30.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

I think using the average population gives way too many low pops. Using 58% of the average pop in 1957 gives the following list. Since Don Bessent was expensive for me, I couldn't see leaving him out.

Low Pop PSA 8s for 1957 (53 or less):
310MAX SURKONT30
300MIKE GARCIA32
335GRANNY HAMNER35
319GINO CIMOLI36
307JACK PHILLIPS39
126BOB WIESLER40
350EDDIE MIKSIS40
280ALEX KELLNER41
347HAL NARAGON41
406BOB HALE41
303BILLY GOODMAN42
171RED SOX TEAM43
291WINDY McCALL43
265HARVEY HADDIX44
299CHUCK HARMON44
343TAYLOR PHILLIPS44
352ELLIS KINDER44
177EDDIE YOST45
99BOB KEEGAN46
139LOU KRETLOW46
292BILLY KLAUS46
298IRV NOREN46
276JIM PYBURN47
279BOB THURMAN47
287SAM JONES47
240HANK BAUER48
270SENATORS TEAM49
340BILL WIGHT49
346DICK LITTLEFIELD49
290ANDY CAREY50
6HECTOR LOPEZ51
331RAY KATT52
178DON BESSENT53

All of the "special" cards would be considered extremely low pop in 8:
CHECKLIST 4/5BAZOOKA 0
176GENE BAKERERROR "EUGENE W. BAKEP"2
CHECKLIST 2/3BAZOOKA 2
CHECKLIST 4/5BIG BLONY 2
CHECKLIST 3/4BAZOOKA 3
CHECKLIST 2/3BIG BLONY 4
CHECKLIST 3/4TWIN BLONY 4
CHECKLIST 1/2BAZOOKA 7
CONTEST CARDSATURDAY, MAY 25TH7
LUCKY PENNY INSERT 7
CONTEST CARDFRIDAY, JULY 19TH9
CHECKLIST 1/2BIG BLONY 11
CONTEST CARDSATURDAY, MAY 4TH11

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

Jim beat me to it.

[Archive]

Posted By: jackgoodman

Thanks Jim and Bob.

Why did you use 58% of the average number to determine a "low pop" number?

Would the same method (number of cards graded divided by number of cards in set) times 58% work for PSA 7's too?

Would this calculation work for any post-war (1950s/1960s) set to determine the "low pop" numbers in high grade (7 - 10)?.

This is really educational - thanks in advance for your continued input.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

58% was reached by working backwards. Nothing at all magical about it. Somewhere around 50 or so would be considered low pop for 57 PSA 8s. I'm sure it varies tremendously from year to year or grade to grade.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

I wouldn't get too attached to trying to come up with a rule of thumb for low pops. Some cards are legitimately hard to find in a certain grade based on centering issues, registration, print dots, etc. Others are hard to find because demand exceeds supply (i.e., a large enough number haven't been submitted yet). Learning to differentiate between the two categories is crucial if you're going to compete for lower population cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Evanov

In terms of acquiring cards Jack, the 1957 set is screwy. You can't always go by the pops.

For example, the #270 SENATORS TEAM [49] and #346 DICK LITTLEFIELD [49] are equal in population, but the PSA 8 Senators averages $350 per card while a PSA 8 Littlefield sells for $90.

Look at #340 BILL WIGHT [49]...easily had for $150, while #139 LOU KRETLOW [46] will run you $400!

There are over 30 active sets on the 1957 Topps baseball PSA Registry with high completion rates/grades. Plus I know of a number of high grade PSA sets not on the Registry. Getting a card for this set in many cases is more influenced by who needs it, rather than its pop.

Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Jack,

Nobody knows more about the 1957 set than Frank--he helped me finish mine. Any specific questions you have I would contact him directly. He will be more than willing to help.

[Archive]

Posted By: Al

Bob---did you know that 67 % of all statistics are made up on the spot

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul S

Al -- You got the numbers to back that up?